Its cheaper to feed kids Fruit Loops than fruit.

[lazerelmo]

What are You going to do to reverse that?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/28/your-interview-president#vseek1850

Just one of many questions posed to the President in this circus. This one took the cake. Ironic that neither the man posing the problem nor the President realized that the solution came with the question when he threw away the box of fruit loops and chose to eat the fruit. No government intervention needed.

Thanks Michelle for getting Wal-mart to put those labels on products for us. :rolleyes

[boutons_deux]

In general, I really doubt the Fruitloop demographic would choose fresh fruit over a bowl of sugary, flavor- and color-enchanced, nutrient-void, chemically laden industrial, food-like substance wetted with milk-like white liquid.

[Blake]

What are You going to do to reverse that?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/28/your-interview-president#vseek1850

Just one of many questions posed to the President in this circus. This one took the cake. Ironic that neither the man posing the problem nor the President realized that the solution came with the question when he threw away the box of fruit loops and chose to eat the fruit. No government intervention needed.

Thanks Michelle for getting Wal-mart to put those labels on products for us. :rolleyes

how does the man posing the problem make fruit cheaper by throwing away the box of froot loops?

[Blake]

In general, I really doubt the Fruitloop demographic would choose fresh fruit over a bowl of sugary, flavor- and color-enchanced, nutrient-void, chemically laden industrial, food-like substance wetted with milk-like white liquid.

froot loops are actually filled with nutrients.

[boutons_deux]

bullshit.

that shit doesn't rot

if it don't rot, don't eat it.

if man made it, don't eat it.

[Blake]

bullshit.

that shit doesn't rot

if it don't rot, don't eat it.

if man made it, don't eat it.

I'm not arguing that it's absolutely good for you. Just saying that it is not void of nutrients.

Read the nutrition label.

[Winehole23]

froot =/= fruit

[baseline bum]

What are You going to do to reverse that?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/28/your-interview-president#vseek1850

Just one of many questions posed to the President in this circus. This one took the cake. Ironic that neither the man posing the problem nor the President realized that the solution came with the question when he threw away the box of fruit loops and chose to eat the fruit. No government intervention needed.

Thanks Michelle for getting Wal-mart to put those labels on products for us. :rolleyes

No government intervention needed to reverse it? Seems a strange position to take when government intervention through subsidies is the reason Froot Loops, McDonald's, and lots of other junk food packed with corn syrup is so cheap in this nation (when you ignore that initial tax that doesn't show up on your receipt).

[LnGrrrR]

What are You going to do to reverse that?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/28/your-interview-president#vseek1850

Just one of many questions posed to the President in this circus. This one took the cake. Ironic that neither the man posing the problem nor the President realized that the solution came with the question when he threw away the box of fruit loops and chose to eat the fruit. No government intervention needed.

Thanks Michelle for getting Wal-mart to put those labels on products for us. :rolleyes

Genetically engineer fruit to last much longer. That's about the only solution I see.

Seriously though, it isn't a great thing that the cheaper foods are also more unhealthy. They're empty calories, for the most part.

[lazerelmo]

No government intervention needed to reverse it? Seems a strange position to take when government intervention through subsidies is the reason Froot Loops, McDonald's, and lots of other junk food packed with corn syrup is so cheap in this nation (when you ignore that initial tax that doesn't show up on your receipt).

I'm sure government farm subsidies help fruit producers as well. There was a time when buying fruit at the grocery store was cheaper than buying processed foods but over the years that changed and I don't think it was government subsidies that changed things nor do I think it was in the hands of the grocery store to change things as the President suggest (if Walmart would just stop buying those dang fruit loops). Choices made by the consumer caused the shift and could cause it to shift back, but why would we do that? Why go back to buying carrots and turnips when you can get a whole serving of vegetables in a glass of V-8? Its called progress. Is it really a bad thing that fresh produce cost more than the box Fruit Loops?

Nope. IMO

[LnGrrrR]

Is it really a bad thing that fresh produce cost more than the box Fruit Loops?


Probably. It's most likely a factor in the nation's growing obesity (along with income inequality, video games, and a number of other reasons).

[baseline bum]

I'm sure government farm subsidies help fruit producers as well. There was a time when buying fruit at the grocery store was cheaper than buying processed foods but over the years that changed and I don't think it was government subsidies that changed things nor do I think it was in the hands of the grocery store to change things as the President suggest (if Walmart would just stop buying those dang fruit loops). Choices made by the consumer caused the shift and could cause it to shift back, but why would we do that? Why go back to buying carrots and turnips when you can get a whole serving of vegetables in a glass of V-8? Its called progress. Is it really a bad thing that fresh produce cost more than the box Fruit Loops?

Nope. IMO

Choices are made by the consumer for all the junk food because it's cheap thanks to our massive subsidy of corn and soybeans. It's not progress seeing our nation turn into a bunch of fat fucks because our oligarchy sold its citizens health down the river. Your progress is one of the chief reasons health care is so ridiculously expensive here.

[coyotes_geek]

Choices are made by the consumer for all the junk food because it's cheap thanks to our massive subsidy of corn and soybeans. It's not progress seeing our nation turn into a bunch of fat fucks because our oligarchy sold its citizens health down the river. Your progress is one of the chief reasons health care is so ridiculously expensive here.

:tu

Yep. If you really want to make healthcare more affordable in this country start taxing junk food the same way we tax cigarettes. You can even distribute the tax proceeds to all taxpayers via personal HSA accounts which they can then use for their medical expenses.

[Blake]

:tu

Yep. If you really want to make healthcare more affordable in this country start taxing junk food the same way we tax cigarettes.

Determining what is and what isn't junk food can be real tricky.

I don't see it happening.

[boutons_deux]

"Genetically engineer fruit to last much longer"

no more Frankenfood. US food supply, every bit of it, is already tainted with GM stuff.

The reason BigFood sells dead food is that that it doesn't rot, has a long shelf life, and it's mostly dry, so lighter to ship.

Fresh fruit/veg is mostly water so it's more expensive to ship, needs shorter shipping times, and is perishable.

Just another case of BigFood corps doing what is best for their profits, while not giving a FF about consumer health.

And American sheeple are more like cows, they'll eat any damn shit BigFood puts on the shelves.

[Winehole23]

:tu

Yep. If you really want to make healthcare more affordable in this country start taxing junk food the same way we tax cigarettes. You can even distribute the tax proceeds to all taxpayers via personal HSA accounts which they can then use for their medical expenses.People who eat badly should be taxed more for it. This is where you thinking dovetails with WC, btw.

[boutons_deux]

Big Win for Biotech: USDA Deregulates Monsanto Alfalfa

After nearly five years of legal and regulatory battles, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has fully deregulated Monsanto's Roundup Ready alfalfa that is genetically modified (GM) to be resistant to Roundup herbicide.

The decision squashed a proposed compromise between the biotech industry and its opponents that would have placed geographic restrictions on Roundup Ready alfalfa to prevent organic and traditional alfalfa from being contaminated by herbicide sprays and transgenes spread by cross-pollination and other factors.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that Roundup Ready alfalfa would be fully deregulated on January 27, just one week after he testified before the House Committee on Agriculture, where committee members pressed Vilsack to fully deregulate Roundup Ready alfalfa and reject the proposal to geographically isolate it from traditional alfalfa.

http://www.truth-out.org/print/67373

==========

America is so fucked, and unfuckable.

[coyotes_geek]

Determining what is and what isn't junk food can be real tricky.

Certainly there would be disagreements over the specifics of what exactly qualifies as junk food and what doesn't. But IMO that doesn't invalidate the concept.


I don't see it happening.

I don't either. Americans would riot if their extra value meal got more expensive.

[LnGrrrR]

"Genetically engineer fruit to last much longer"

no more Frankenfood. US food supply, every bit of it, is already tainted with GM stuff.

The reason BigFood sells dead food is that that it doesn't rot, has a long shelf life, and it's mostly dry, so lighter to ship.

Fresh fruit/veg is mostly water so it's more expensive to ship, needs shorter shipping times, and is perishable.

Just another case of BigFood corps doing what is best for their profits, while not giving a FF about consumer health.

And American sheeple are more like cows, they'll eat any damn shit BigFood puts on the shelves.

I'm just saying, if you want fruit to compete with things like a cereal, you're going to have to find a way to make them last much longer. The relatively short life of fruit/veggies is going to keep costs higher than items which have much longer shelf-lives.

The other reasons you mentioned as well. IOW, I have no idea on how to make fruit cost less/equal.

[baseline bum]

:tu

Yep. If you really want to make healthcare more affordable in this country start taxing junk food the same way we tax cigarettes. You can even distribute the tax proceeds to all taxpayers via personal HSA accounts which they can then use for their medical expenses.

It's a tough question to me. I hate seeing McDonald's able to advertise to kids and get them hooked on a lifetime of toxic junk food like fries and cokes by bribing them with toys and bombarding them with friendly cartoon characters and the like. I guess I agree with San Francisco's decision to kill the toys in Happy Meals, since a child can't realistically be expected to make decisions for his own good. Otherwise, why not let kids drink, why not let them smoke, why not let them drive, why not let them have sex with adults, and so on?

On the other hand, I hate the idea of a sin tax. That just opens the floodgates to people who want to screw me over if I want to buy a 6-pack of beer or an occasional bag of weed. I'd be happy if we just ended the subsidization and didn't give such a competitive advantage to processed junk food in our stores. If you don't have good money it's pretty easy to go to Wendy's or Taco Bell to feed your kids than to pay for non-subsidized produce and meats. We shouldn't be actively pushing people towards this garbage.

[Winehole23]

One would think bad health and an early death were bad enough.

Apparently, much akin to the notion of soaking the rich, those who are so unfortunate as to have suffered ill health according to their own choices, deserve to pay even more for the privilege.

[Blake]

It's a tough question to me. I hate seeing McDonald's able to advertise to kids and get them hooked on a lifetime of toxic junk food like fries and cokes by bribing them with toys and bombarding them with friendly cartoon characters and the like. I guess I agree with San Francisco's decision to kill the toys in Happy Meals, since a child can't realistically be expected to make decisions for his own good. Otherwise, why not let kids drink, why not let them smoke, why not let them drive, why not let them have sex with adults, and so on?


lol gateway toys

[baseline bum]

lol gateway toys

Can you expand on this?

[ohmwrecker]

Fruit and vegetables are cheap. People are just lazy. Plain and simple. My kid eats fruit and vegetables. We don't buy sugar cereal, soda pop, processed foods and he doesn't want any of it. If that means I have to make a few mini trips to the market in addition to the big grocery trip for fresh fruit, then I'll do it. If you don't care about your own health, that's on you, but people who can't help their kids make good, healthy choices make me sick.

[Winehole23]

Never mind that not all "junk" effects everyone the same, or that nutrition of whatever given quality is organically needful in a very basic sense.

[Winehole23]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-07/sysco-2nd-quarter-profit-falls-4-pct-on-food-costs.html

[coyotes_geek]

People who eat badly should be taxed more for it.

If we're going to accept the premise that we are all suffering from high medical costs and that something must be done about it, wouldn't it stand to reason to target a behavior that directly leads to increased medical costs? If anything, it's a "users fee".


This is where you thinking dovetails with WC, btw.

Libtard! :p:


It's a tough question to me. I hate seeing McDonald's able to advertise to kids and get them hooked on a lifetime of toxic junk food like fries and cokes by bribing them with toys and bombarding them with friendly cartoon characters and the like. I guess I agree with San Francisco's decision to kill the toys in Happy Meals, since a child can't realistically be expected to make decisions for his own good. Otherwise, why not let kids drink, why not let them smoke, why not let them drive, why not let them have sex with adults, and so on?

On the other hand, I hate the idea of a sin tax. That just opens the floodgates to people who want to screw me over if I want to buy a 6-pack of beer or an occasional bag of weed. I'd be happy if we just ended the subsidization and didn't give such a competitive advantage to processed junk food in our stores. If you don't have good money it's pretty easy to go to Wendy's or Taco Bell to feed your kids than to pay for non-subsidized produce and meats. We shouldn't be actively pushing people towards this garbage.

I'm not a fan of sin taxes either. That being said, I don't think there's any arguement we would all benefit if we as a nation got healthier, both health-wise and financially. So, IMO at least, it would be worth it.

[ohmwrecker]

Who pays sales tax on weed?

[Winehole23]

If we're going to accept the premise that we are all suffering from high medical costs and that something must be done about it, wouldn't it stand to reason to target a behavior that directly leads to increased medical costs? If anything, it's a "users fee". Insofar as the target of the the fee is a well-defined social miscreant it might go over well.

[Spurminator]

I don't really like the idea of taxing fast food, but if we did I'd want to make sure those funds went directly back to the people in the form of some kind of healthy lifestyle subsidy. Gym membership credits? Children's athletic leagues?

[Winehole23]

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-06/business/ct-biz-0206-healthy-restaurants-20110206_1_restaurant-mix-restaurant-industry-burger

[Blake]

Can you expand on this?

Was just joking.

Kids jumping from mcdonald toys to cigarettes made me lol.

[LnGrrrR]

Fruit and vegetables are cheap. People are just lazy. Plain and simple. My kid eats fruit and vegetables. We don't buy sugar cereal, soda pop, processed foods and he doesn't want any of it. If that means I have to make a few mini trips to the market in addition to the big grocery trip for fresh fruit, then I'll do it. If you don't care about your own health, that's on you, but people who can't help their kids make good, healthy choices make me sick.

Fruits and veggies may be cheap relatively speaking, but they are more expensive than unhealthier foods, and have a shorter shelf-life.

And your plan might not be valid in a rural area; heck up until a few years back my folks would have to drive an hour or so away to go grocery shopping.

[Drachen]

bullshit.

that shit doesn't rot

if it don't rot, don't eat it.

if man made it, don't eat it.

Im a man, I made some chili this weekend, and I ate a ton of it.... because I don't want it to rot. LOL

[boutons_deux]

fresh food is definitely more expensive than dead food, calorie for calorie.

That's why poor people eat that industrial food-like shit. It's very cheap, filling, delicious heavily engineered calories. And the poor have more diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease, high blood pressure, get sicker and die younger than the upper 3 quintiles. Death by a 1000 mouthfuls.

[sickdsm]

The solution is to raise cheap food prices to match fruits and veggies.



Seriously thought, think about it. The US has had the cheapest, most abundant supply of food in the world for how many years? We spend fractions of our paycheck on food than other countries do.


baseline bum: You seem very misinformed. You seem to imply that corn is to blame for poor food. Do you really think if corn was gone you wouldn't have cane sugar/sugar beet sweetner added? You DO realize its the same thing, right?

[sickdsm]

Big Win for Biotech: USDA Deregulates Monsanto Alfalfa

After nearly five years of legal and regulatory battles, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has fully deregulated Monsanto's Roundup Ready alfalfa that is genetically modified (GM) to be resistant to Roundup herbicide.

The decision squashed a proposed compromise between the biotech industry and its opponents that would have placed geographic restrictions on Roundup Ready alfalfa to prevent organic and traditional alfalfa from being contaminated by herbicide sprays and transgenes spread by cross-pollination and other factors.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that Roundup Ready alfalfa would be fully deregulated on January 27, just one week after he testified before the House Committee on Agriculture, where committee members pressed Vilsack to fully deregulate Roundup Ready alfalfa and reject the proposal to geographically isolate it from traditional alfalfa.

http://www.truth-out.org/print/67373

==========

America is so fucked, and unfuckable.

RR alfalfa has been around for a long time you idiot. Quit bringing some lame ass article into this. RR Alf was ok'd years ago, they took it off the market but the fields that were planted were grandfathered in.

You're ten years late to this argument.

[sickdsm]

if unhealthy food costs more than healthy food, you can't just simply tax the unhealthy food..40 million americans are already on food stamps as it is, nobody would be able to afford to eat. the solution is coming up with better farming technology and restoring our economy back where people can actually afford food.



NOOOOO! God forbid we advance beyond taking a hoe and burying a fish under each corn and soybean plant.

Plus, boutons wouldn't want the rural people to improve their economy.

restoring our economy back where people can actually afford food



Cheapest food in the world, somethings wrong if you can't afford it.

[Winehole23]

The solution is to raise cheap food prices to match fruits and veggies. In other words, the government should give natural foods a leg up by raising the price of junk food.

(So much for personal responsibility and the free market.)

[LnGrrrR]

Cheapest food in the world, somethings wrong if you can't afford it.

Well... that is the whole point of the thread, isn't it? :lol

[LnGrrrR]

In other words, the government should give natural foods a leg up by raising the price of junk food.

(So much for personal responsibility and the free market.)

To be fair, if junk foods are getting a leg up through government handouts (ie. corn production), then it's leveling the playing field.

Of course, some of those corn subsidies are there to ensure that we will still have adequate amts of corn during a poor season, so it's certainly not black and white.

[MiamiHeat]

kinda funny how obese people were seen as wealthy, and skinny toned people were seen as poor throughout all of human history.

thats been reversed in the past 80 years lol. if you're in shape, chances are you got more money than the fatass who eats mcd's everyday.

[Winehole23]

@LNGR: It's a fair point, but what sickdsm was talking about sounded much more like price controls.

[MiamiHeat]

@LNGR: It's a fair point, but what sickdsm was talking about sounded much more like price controls.

what about granting farmers the same subsidies for growing fruits?

bring the price of both down?

[LnGrrrR]

@LNGR: It's a fair point, but what sickdsm was talking about sounded much more like price controls.

I can see that take. I don't think price controls are the way to go though. as others have said, reducing subsidies may be the key.

Of course, that would require an objective analysis of current subsidies and the amount they're used properly vs abused.

[baseline bum]

The solution is to raise cheap food prices to match fruits and veggies.



Seriously thought, think about it. The US has had the cheapest, most abundant supply of food in the world for how many years? We spend fractions of our paycheck on food than other countries do.


baseline bum: You seem very misinformed. You seem to imply that corn is to blame for poor food. Do you really think if corn was gone you wouldn't have cane sugar/sugar beet sweetner added? You DO realize its the same thing, right?

Corn is fine. Subsidizing it so that every single thing in the supermarket is loaded with corn syrup is ridiculous. Even ignoring the health effects, it tastes like shit.

[Winehole23]

@MH: I'd be more in favor of the US removing ag subsidies entirely, but that's me.

[DarrinS]

People have been eating Fruit Loops since the early 1960's. I'm surprised we're not all dead by now.

[ploto]

It is cheaper to cook fresh food at home than to buy out food anywhere. I see lots of people who claim to have no money going out to eat all the time.

I also see people with food stamps buying all kinds of processed pre-fab meals that are more expensive than buying a whole chicken and baking it.

I grew up in a large family and saw first hand the amount of people you can feed for not much when you actually cook every day. We ate meals with roast and fresh potatoes and carrots.

[coyotes_geek]

One would think bad health and an early death were bad enough.

Apparently, much akin to the notion of soaking the rich, those who are so unfortunate as to have suffered ill health according to their own choices, deserve to pay even more for the privilege.

I sympathize with the "free will" position, however, how do you reconcile that against a system where the one person exercizing his free will to choose an unhealthy lifestyle isn't the only one who has to suffer the financial consequences of his decision?


Insofar as the target of the the fee is a well-defined social miscreant it might go over well.

Not a social miscreant. Just someone engaging in a behavior likely to result in an avoidable expense to the healthcare system. Not much different than a car insurer charging teenage drivers more. It's not because they're social miscreants, it's because there's a higher probability that they're going to cause an expense that will ultimately be borne by the insurer/other insured.

[ohmwrecker]

Fruits and veggies may be cheap relatively speaking, but they are more expensive than unhealthier foods, and have a shorter shelf-life.

And your plan might not be valid in a rural area; heck up until a few years back my folks would have to drive an hour or so away to go grocery shopping.

Most rural areas have farmer's markets. I mean, what did people do 35-40 years ago when there were more people populating rural/undeveloped areas and there were less supermarkets and processed foods available? Eat dirt? Everyone seems to have forgotten that people used to eat a lot healthier with less conveniences than we have now. It's ignorance and laziness. There's no getting around that.

[coyotes_geek]

Just out of curiousity, anyone know how much a box of an unhealthy cereal like fruit loops costs compared to a box of healthy cereal like cheerios?

I'm having a really hard time believing that healthy foods are simply unaffordable.

[ohmwrecker]

Just out of curiousity, anyone know how much a box of an unhealthy cereal like fruit loops costs compared to a box of healthy cereal like cheerios?

I'm having a really hard time believing that healthy foods are simply unaffordable.

They are relatively the same price and healthy foods aren't unaffordable, people are just fat, dumb and lazy.

[LnGrrrR]

Most rural areas have farmer's markets. I mean, what did people do 35-40 years ago when there were more people populating rural/undeveloped areas and there were less supermarkets and processed foods available? Eat dirt? Everyone seems to have forgotten that people used to eat a lot healthier with less conveniences than we have now. It's ignorance and laziness. There's no getting around that.

Back then, wage equality was much more prevalent.

And due to big supermarkets, I'm sure there's a lot less farmers markets, no?

Just playing Devils Advocate a bit here.

[lefty]

I know a few people who got serious health problems because of aspartame

A few days after they got off diet sodas, they got much much better

I thought the whole aspartame paranoia was BS, but apparently it's not


Stay away from that shit

[ohmwrecker]

Back then, wage equality was much more prevalent.

And due to big supermarkets, I'm sure there's a lot less farmers markets, no?

Just playing Devils Advocate a bit here.

There are a shit-ton of small farm's and farmer's markets where I live. I don't think it's that much more expensive for people to eat healthier, or at least start to add some healthier food choices to their diets. I've been reading a lot about it since becoming a father and it really boils down to the minor inconveniences of seeking out healthier options and making smaller, more frequent trips to the market for fresh (preferably locally grown) foods.

[SnakeBoy]

It is cheaper to cook fresh food at home than to buy out food anywhere. I see lots of people who claim to have no money going out to eat all the time.

I also see people with food stamps buying all kinds of processed pre-fab meals that are more expensive than buying a whole chicken and baking it.

I grew up in a large family and saw first hand the amount of people you can feed for not much when you actually cook every day. We ate meals with roast and fresh potatoes and carrots.

This is what I think is the basic cause of our nations health epidemic (obesity, diatbetes, etc.). It amazes me at how most everyone I know is feeding their kids fast food and pre-fab meals all week long and the healthy home cooked meal is left for a special occasion. Exactly opposite of how I grew up. The claim that it's too expensive to eat healthy is pure bs.

[byrontx]

froot loops are actually filled with nutrients.

It's like crushing up a box of oreos then sprinkling a cheap multi-vitamin over them-it doesn't make it really nutricious or even food for that matter. Moreover, the forms of the vitamins and minerals that they add are not the ones that actually benefit a human body.

[Winehole23]

They are relatively the same price and healthy foods aren't unaffordable, people are just fat, dumb and lazy.Too bad progressive middle-brow disdain for more lumpen predilections isn't meliorative -- there seems to be an endless supply. :lol



"Oh well, what you cannot correct you can at least insult." (Barry Hannah, I think)

[Winehole23]

I sympathize with the "free will" position, however, how do you reconcile that against a system where the one person exercizing his free will to choose an unhealthy lifestyle isn't the only one who has to suffer the financial consequences of his decision? Eminently reasonable. Practically irresistible from the standpoint of actuarial common sense.

Not a social miscreant. Just someone engaging in a behavior likely to result in an avoidable expense to the healthcare system. Based on the probabilities, an extra premium is attached to certain commodities/activities likely to result in avoidable expense to the healthcare system. Like junk food.

[2centsworth]

.... how do you reconcile that against a system where the one person exercizing his free will to choose an unhealthy lifestyle isn't the only one who has to suffer the financial consequences of his decision?

we voted for that system from our own free will.

freedom is not the enemy.

[Winehole23]

^^^out of step with the paternalistic administration of everyday life by a caring and professional bureaucracy.

We've been voting for an activist state in the USA for a long time -- about 75 years.

[Winehole23]

We voted for that system too, though as you pointed out that is very much at odds with certain first principles.

[boutons_deux]

I know a few people who got serious health problems because of aspartame


Stuff happens.

http://www.naturalnews.com/z026849_aspartame_health_Donald_Rumsfeld.html

[LnGrrrR]

This is what I think is the basic cause of our nations health epidemic (obesity, diatbetes, etc.). It amazes me at how most everyone I know is feeding their kids fast food and pre-fab meals all week long and the healthy home cooked meal is left for a special occasion. Exactly opposite of how I grew up. The claim that it's too expensive to eat healthy is pure bs.

Well, there's a big change in demographics from even a few decades ago. Alot more households now have both parents working, so it's easier for the parents to grab something quick.

Again, not saying it's right, but looking at the different factors involved. Another factor might be to see if the average worker puts in more hours at work now than they did a decade or two ago.

[MiamiHeat]

In 1968, indexed by inflation, the minimum wage was $9.00 / hour.

In Denmark, the min wage is $18 / hour.

If the country had kept the min wage in a static increase since 1968, the min wage today would be $24 / hour.


you see, the less you pay workers, they less they can buy. If everyone is "cutting costs" as a way to be "successful", then the population cannot afford as much products anymore. This hurts everyone in every industry.

tbh, this country should be ashamed of itself.

[Winehole23]

you see, the less you pay workers, they less they can buy. If everyone is "cutting costs" as a way to be "successful", then the population cannot afford as much products anymore. This hurts everyone in every industry.Rates of compensation are not calibrated to international norms, but to the custom and moral feeling of the country. That's as it should be in my view.

[boutons_deux]

"If everyone is "cutting costs" as a way to be "successful""

The cost cutting is brutal because the savings go to the low-taxed mgmt, not into investment in USA.

Low-taxes encourages mgmt to take the corporate money and run. High taxes, corporate and personal, encourage investment to benefit from investment tax breaks. Real growth and wealth creation comes from investment, not from the mgmt pocketing 250x the average wage

[BlairForceDejuan]

Other than Meat and blueberries, healthy food is cheap. Bishes just too lazy and ignorant to know how to cook.

Knocking out 4k calories in fast food in one hour is easy.Stomaching 4k calories worth of healthy food in a day is torture.

[BlairForceDejuan]

double post

[sickdsm]

Well... that is the whole point of the thread, isn't it? :lol


If its the cheapest food in the world, why do we act like its too expensive then?

[sickdsm]

@LNGR: It's a fair point, but what sickdsm was talking about sounded much more like price controls.

I even started the next sentence with "But seriously...." and you're too stupid to catch that?

[sickdsm]

what about granting farmers the same subsidies for growing fruits?

bring the price of both down?

Maybe we should just give all food away? I'm sure someone would be bitching about how much it costs to go to the store.

[sickdsm]

Corn is fine. Subsidizing it so that every single thing in the supermarket is loaded with corn syrup is ridiculous. Even ignoring the health effects, it tastes like shit.

BS. You mean to tell me you can instantly taste the difference between something sweetened with corn syrup and other forms of sugar?

[Blake]

Just out of curiousity, anyone know how much a box of an unhealthy cereal like fruit loops costs compared to a box of healthy cereal like cheerios?

I'm having a really hard time believing that healthy foods are simply unaffordable.

what's the definition of a unhealthy cereal?

[Blake]

It's like crushing up a box of oreos then sprinkling a cheap multi-vitamin over them-it doesn't make it really nutricious or even food for that matter.

Moreover, the forms of the vitamins and minerals that they add are not the ones that actually benefit a human body.

what kind of vitamins and minerals does Kellogg's use?

link showing they don't benefit a human body?

[boutons_deux]

As intended all along, BigFood dumbs you down, addicts you, so you keep buying BigFood shit

Junk food diet linked to lower IQ


Toddlers who have a diet high in processed foods may have a slightly lower IQ in later life, according to a British study described as the biggest research of its kind.

The conclusion, published on Monday, comes from a long-term investigation into 14,000 people born in western England in 1991 and 1992 whose health and well-being were monitored at the ages of three, four, seven and eight and a half.

Parents of the children were asked to fill out questionnaires that, among other things, detailed the kind of food and drink their children consumed.

Three dietary patterns emerged: one was high in processed fats and sugar; then there was a "traditional" diet high in meat and vegetables; and finally a "health-conscious" diet with lots of salad, fruit and vegetables, pasta and rice.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/junk-food-diet-linked-iq/

============

BigFood hits the jackpot when the parents are dumb enough, perhaps dumbed down from decades of eating BigFood shit, to feed their kids BigFood shit. Does anybody still wonder why obesity and heart disease "runs in families"?

[lefty]

Stuff happens.

http://www.naturalnews.com/z026849_aspartame_health_Donald_Rumsfeld.html
Fuck Aspartame

Fuck Donald Rumsfeld, that dangerous piece of shit

Fuck the Food & Death Administration

[Blake]

Fuck Aspartame

Fuck Donald Rumsfeld, that dangerous piece of shit

Fuck the Food & Death Administration

Do you know anyone that has died from consuming too much aspartame?

[lefty]

Do you know anyone that has died from consuming too much aspartame?
No, but see my previous post

[Blake]

No, but see my previous post

How many people have you known that had health problems because of aspartame?

What exactly were the health problems?

How many diet sodas did they drink a day?

Why are they certain it was the aspartame and not something else?

[coyotes_geek]

what's the definition of a unhealthy cereal?

Not all cereals are equally healthy for you. I have faith in your ability to figure it out from there.

[TeyshaBlue]

Not all cereals are equally healthy for you. I have faith in your ability to figure it out from there.

I like the new Beef Steak Crunch cereal. The sugar frosted gravy really makes it work.

http://www.cerealfreak.com/pictures/cereal-freak-11149.jpg

[Blake]

Not all cereals are equally healthy for you. I have faith in your ability to figure it out from there.

I do have my own definition of healthy/unhealthy foods.

You are the one that brought up taxation of junk food. I was curious what your definition is.

[boutons_deux]

Industrial breakfast cereals, even the "health food" stuff, is almost completely fast carbs (and lots of subsidized corn filler) from the processed grains, then added sugar/HFCS, then artificial flavoring/coloring/whoknowswhatthefuckelse, preservatives. Almost no fats/oil or protein, so it's not satiating, and quickly digested, so you're hungry faster, want their shitty snacks in a couple hours to hold you over.

[Blake]

Industrial breakfast cereals, even the "health food" stuff, is almost completely fast carbs (and lots of subsidized corn filler) from the processed grains, then added sugar/HFCS, then artificial flavoring/coloring/whoknowswhatthefuckelse, preservatives. Almost no fats/oil or protein, so it's not satiating, and quickly digested, so you're hungry faster, want their shitty snacks in a couple hours to hold you over.

Just fyi, froot loops does not contain hfcs

[lefty]

What exactly were the health problems?

How many diet sodas did they drink a day?

Why are they certain it was the aspartame and not something else?
1. MS like symptoms, migraine, restless leg/numbness

2. on average, probably, around 2 a day

3. Well, 2 of them (a couple) went to see different doctors; the 3rd one asked them if they were consuming diet sodas on a regular basis; they got off diet coke/pepsi and started to feel much much better after 4 days; they told our friends about itl they too stopped drinking diet sodas and their symptoms went away after a few days.

[coyotes_geek]

I do have my own definition of healthy/unhealthy foods.

You are the one that brought up taxation of junk food. I was curious what your definition is.

I don't have one. It's a concept.

[Blake]

1. MS like symptoms, migraine, restless leg/numbness

2. on average, probably, around 2 a day

3. Well, 2 of them (a couple) went to see different doctors; the 3rd one asked them if they were consuming diet sodas on a regular basis; they got off diet coke/pepsi and started to feel much much better after 4 days; they told our friends about itl they too stopped drinking diet sodas and their symptoms went away after a few days.

I wont tell you not to believe friends' anecdotes, but I will tell you that you sound like Nancy Markle.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990167,00.html

[Blake]

I don't have one. It's a concept.

I'm an advocate of the concept myself. The problem always comes back to where the line gets drawn between healthy and unhealthy.

Was hoping to hear about a concrete line.

[boutons_deux]

"hear about a concrete line"

If it doesn't rot, don't eat it.

If man made it (or adulterated it), don't eat it.

[lefty]

I wont tell you not to believe friends' anecdotes, but I will tell you that you sound like Nancy Markle.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990167,00.html
Interesting stuff

Thanks for the link :tu

[Blake]

"hear about a concrete line"

If it doesn't rot, don't eat it.

If man made it (or adulterated it), don't eat it.

Do you think there should be a tax on food that doesn't rot?

[boutons_deux]

no, not a tax.

a boycott, and on everything from BigFood.

radical solution? yes, because the BigFood is a radical problem

[boutons_deux]

...

[ohmwrecker]

Too bad progressive middle-brow disdain for more lumpen predilections isn't meliorative -- there seems to be an endless supply.

I know I'm being harsh, but the mass majority of people who are addicted to the junk food diet are actually making it more difficult for people who want to eat healthy. They are keeping the junk food industry in business and eliminating choices for people who want to change. It's sad, really.

What are you doing besides judging every opinion no matter the side?

[Blake]

no, not a tax.

a boycott, and on everything from BigFood.

radical solution? yes, because the BigFood is a radical problem

Eh. I think overeating is the main problem myself.

Potato chips don't really rot until you open the bag. Are they safe to eat?

[Winehole23]

I know I'm being harsh, but the mass majority of people who are addicted to the junk food diet are actually making it more difficult for people who want to eat healthy. They are keeping the junk food industry in business and eliminating choices for people who want to change. It's sad, really.I don't really see how my poor dietary choices interfere with your freedom to treat yourself right. Besides, if there was no junk food on the shelf it wouldn't be as much of a true choice, would it?

What are you doing besides judging every opinion no matter the side?Dunno. Is there something wrong with that?

[Blake]

I know I'm being harsh, but the mass majority of people who are addicted to the junk food diet are actually making it more difficult for people who want to eat healthy. They are keeping the junk food industry in business and eliminating choices for people who want to change. It's sad, really.

What are you doing besides judging every opinion no matter the side?

What healthy choice specifically has the junk food industry eliminated?

[ohmwrecker]

I don't really see how my poor dietary choices interfere with your freedom to treat yourself right. Besides, if there was no junk food on the shelf it wouldn't be as much of a true choice, would it?

I don't think there should be NO choice, but some equality and availability of healthier foods would help people who want to make better choices but feel it's an inconvenience (especially financially to do so). More competition would lower prices across the board.

[ohmwrecker]

What healthy choice specifically has the junk food industry eliminated?

Let me give an example:

Government subsidized farms that grow massive amounts of corn for hfcs products are not allowed to grow any other food that they can sell in a free market economy. The government is literally pushing junk food on the American public and taking the market for fresh, healthy food out of the equation.

[greyforest]

As intended all along, BigFood dumbs you down, addicts you, so you keep buying BigFood shit

Junk food diet linked to lower IQ


Toddlers who have a diet high in processed foods may have a slightly lower IQ in later life, according to a British study described as the biggest research of its kind.

The conclusion, published on Monday, comes from a long-term investigation into 14,000 people born in western England in 1991 and 1992 whose health and well-being were monitored at the ages of three, four, seven and eight and a half.

Parents of the children were asked to fill out questionnaires that, among other things, detailed the kind of food and drink their children consumed.

Three dietary patterns emerged: one was high in processed fats and sugar; then there was a "traditional" diet high in meat and vegetables; and finally a "health-conscious" diet with lots of salad, fruit and vegetables, pasta and rice.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/junk-food-diet-linked-iq/

============

BigFood hits the jackpot when the parents are dumb enough, perhaps dumbed down from decades of eating BigFood shit, to feed their kids BigFood shit. Does anybody still wonder why obesity and heart disease "runs in families"?

Couldn't it also be that the low IQ kids had low IQ parents with low-wage jobs who couldn't afford anything but the crap food?

Correlation != cause. Fake food definitely causes obesity, though.

[ohmwrecker]

Couldn't it also be that the low IQ kids had low IQ parents with low-wage jobs who couldn't afford anything but the crap food?

Correlation != cause. Fake food definitely causes obesity, though.

I see your point, but healthy food does not really cost more. It is more about time, effort an inconvenience.

[greyforest]

I see your point, but healthy food does not really cost more. It is more about time, effort an inconvenience.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/a-high-price-for-healthy-food/


Healthy eating really does cost more.

That’s what University of Washington researchers found when they compared the prices of 370 foods sold at supermarkets in the Seattle area. Calorie for calorie, junk foods not only cost less than fruits and vegetables, but junk food prices also are less likely to rise as a result of inflation. The findings, reported in the current issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, may help explain why the highest rates of obesity are seen among people in lower-income groups.

The scientists took an unusual approach, essentially comparing the price of a calorie in a junk food to one consumed in a healthier meal. Although fruits and vegetables are rich in nutrients, they also contain relatively few calories. Foods with high energy density, meaning they pack the most calories per gram, included candy, pastries, baked goods and snacks.

The survey found that higher-calorie, energy-dense foods are the better bargain for cash-strapped shoppers. Energy-dense munchies cost on average $1.76 per 1,000 calories, compared with $18.16 per 1,000 calories for low-energy but nutritious foods.

The survey also showed that low-calorie foods were more likely to increase in price, surging 19.5 percent over the two-year study period. High-calorie foods remained a relative bargain, dropping in price by 1.8 percent.

Although people don’t knowingly shop for calories per se, the data show that it’s easier for low-income people to sustain themselves on junk food rather than fruits and vegetables, says the study’s lead author Adam Drewnowski, director of the center for public health nutrition at the University of Washington. Based on his findings, a 2,000-calorie diet would cost just $3.52 a day if it consisted of junk food, compared with $36.32 a day for a diet of low-energy dense foods. However, most people eat a mix of foods. The average American spends about $7 a day on food, although low-income people spend about $4, says Dr. Drewnowski.

But it’s easier to overeat junk food, Dr. Drewnowski adds, both because it tastes good and because eaters often must consume a greater volume in order to feel satisfied. Still, even those who consume twice as much in junk food calories are still spending far less than healthy eaters.

“If you have $3 to feed yourself, your choices gravitate toward foods which give you the most calories per dollar,’’ said Dr. Drewnowski. “Not only are the empty calories cheaper, but the healthy foods are becoming more and more expensive. Vegetables and fruits are rapidly becoming luxury goods.”

[Blake]

Let me give an example:

Government subsidized farms that grow massive amounts of corn for hfcs products are not allowed to grow any other food that they can sell in a free market economy. The government is literally pushing junk food on the American public and taking the market for fresh, healthy food out of the equation.

What fresh healthy food has been taken out of the equation?

[ohmwrecker]

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/a-high-price-for-healthy-food/

Fruit and vegetables are cheap. Grains and legumes are cheap. Eggs and dairy are relatively cheap. It takes more time and effort to shop more frequently in smaller quantities than to buy more food with longer shelf life and higher calories and it is less convenient to plan and prepare healthy meals than to eat junk/fast foo, but it isn't really extraordinarily more expensive. I'm not buying it.

[ohmwrecker]

What fresh healthy food has been taken out of the equation?

The food that large farms are not allowed to grow . . .

[boutons_deux]

Eh. I think overeating is the main problem myself.

Potato chips don't really rot until you open the bag. Are they safe to eat?

I consider BigFood to include fast food and chain restaurants that serve too big portions.

BigFood sells high-calorie density food, facilitating consuming too many calories.

It's quite hard to consume too many calories when eating fresh, whole foods.

Potato chips are crap.

Take a pure-starch/fast carb piece of potato, fry/soak it in high-temp oil, and salt thoroughly (and they probably put HFCS int there somewhere). Delicious? yes. Garbage? yes.

[greyforest]

Fruit and vegetables are cheap. Grains and legumes are cheap. Eggs and dairy are relatively cheap. It takes more time and effort to shop more frequently in smaller quantities than to buy more food with longer shelf life and higher calories and it is less convenient to plan and prepare healthy meals than to eat junk/fast foo, but it isn't really extraordinarily more expensive. I'm not buying it.

I'm not disagreeing with any of your points, but that research pretty conclusively shows that it really is extraordinarily more expensive to buy the same amount of calories worth of healthy food as compared to junk (in Seattle). You're basically saying that the University of Washington is lying for no reason.

[ohmwrecker]

I'm not disagreeing with any of your points, but that research pretty conclusively shows that it really is extraordinarily more expensive to buy the same amount of calories worth of healthy food as compared to junk (in Seattle). You're basically saying that the University of Washington is lying for no reason.

No, it's true. I'm saying it's not that much more expensive and probably cheaper in the long run considering the negative aspect on general health that could be avoided.

I would also ask the question . . . Are Americans, on average, consuming more calories than they actually need?

[Blake]

The food that large farms are not allowed to grow . . .

Which is?

[ohmwrecker]

Which is?

Any food that is not corn being grown specifically for hfcs products. Are you enjoying being intentionally obtuse, or do you have a point?

[Blake]

I consider BigFood to include fast food and chain restaurants that serve too big portions.

BigFood sells high-calorie density food, facilitating consuming too many calories.

It's quite hard to consume too many calories when eating fresh, whole foods.

Potato chips are crap.

Take a pure-starch/fast carb piece of potato, fry/soak it in high-temp oil, and salt thoroughly (and they probably put HFCS int there somewhere). Delicious? yes. Garbage? yes.

:cry lays only contain potatoes, salt and oil. I like them. Please don't boycott them.

[Blake]

Any food that is not corn being grown specifically for hfcs products. Are you enjoying being intentionally obtuse, or do you have a point?

No. just name a specific food that large farms aren't allowed to grow. Is it too difficult a question to answer?

[DMX7]

I blame poor people.

[ohmwrecker]

No. just name a specific food that large farms aren't allowed to grow. Is it too difficult a question to answer?

Grain.

[Blake]

Grain.

I see plenty of whole grain items on the shelves at the supermarket. Whole grain breads are relatively cheap. Hell, they even sell whole grain pasta.

I'm not sure how grains are being taken out of the equation.

[ohmwrecker]

I see plenty of whole grain items on the shelves at the supermarket. Whole grain breads are relatively cheap. I'm not sure how grains are being taken out of the equation.

I never said they weren't available, or unaffordable. In fact, that is pretty much my whole point. The next time you go to the grocery store, try to take notice of the prominence in placement and massive quantities of junk food as opposed to healthy food.

I'm talking about the equality, in availability and price, of healthy foods in the market. If less are whole grain products are being produced, then there will be less available at higher prices. Farms are being subsidized to grow specific foods to make specific products. The marketplace has to rely on smaller farms that aren't subsidized (or on American soil) to make smaller quantities of foods produced for healthier products.

What are you still having trouble with?

[greyforest]

No, it's true. I'm saying it's not that much more expensive and probably cheaper in the long run considering the negative aspect on general health that could be avoided.

But it is "that much more" expensive, over ten times more expensive with their selected food items. It's absolutely cheaper in the long run considering the negative aspect on general health that could be avoided, but we're talking about the price of food, not the price of food plus the price of medical treatment from eating it for twenty years.

Your foresight is not evident to poor people who are feeding their children.



I would also ask the question . . . Are Americans, on average, consuming more calories than they actually need?

Yes.


Are Americans, on average, are consuming less nutrients than they actually need?

Yes.




Interesting...it's like...it's like they're eating calorie-laden food with no nutrients.

!!!!!!! WAIT I THINK SOMETHING JUST CLICKED

[ohmwrecker]

But it is "that much more" expensive, over ten times more expensive with their selected food items.

Yes. If "selected" means shopping at Whole Foods and buying boutique health foods, then yes, it's a lot more expensive, but that's not what I am talking about. I'm talking about making healthier choices at an average grocery store, the planning and preparation of meals using fresh, healthy ingredients.

It's not a revolutionary idea. It's as simple as Cheerios>Froot Loops or Fruit>Fruit Roll Ups or Yogurt>GoGurt . . . make your own cookies, don't buy soda pop . . . it's not hard.

[Winehole23]

Undernourished, overfed.


(effed)

[Blake]

The government is literally pushing junk food on the American public and taking the market for fresh, healthy food out of the equation.


I never said they weren't available, or unaffordable. In fact, that is pretty much my whole point.

Not available, just being taken out of the equation?

k.


The next time you go to the grocery store, try to take notice of the prominence in placement and massive quantities of junk food as opposed to healthy food.

Aside from endcap displays, I notice placement of healthy items right next to the "junk food".


I'm talking about the equality, in availability and price, of healthy foods in the market. If less are whole grain products are being produced, then there will be less available at higher prices. Farms are being subsidized to grow specific foods to make specific products. The marketplace has to rely on smaller farms that aren't subsidized (or on American soil) to make smaller quantities of foods produced for healthier products.

Again, I see plenty of whole grain products on the shelves at HEB.

Yes, they are more expensive than items that contain processed bleached flour et al, but they are there. There also seems to be more and more whole grain items available than there were even 5 years ago.


What are you still having trouble with?

So apparently your conclusion is that the government is taking whole grain food out of the equation.

I was asking questions to give you the opportunity to provide evidence of such. You haven't, so I'll go ahead and call bullshit.

No more troubles. :tu

[LnGrrrR]

Fruit and vegetables are cheap. Grains and legumes are cheap. Eggs and dairy are relatively cheap. It takes more time and effort to shop more frequently in smaller quantities than to buy more food with longer shelf life and higher calories and it is less convenient to plan and prepare healthy meals than to eat junk/fast foo, but it isn't really extraordinarily more expensive. I'm not buying it.

Well, that's why he posted the study... :lol

And more families have both parents working now, so saying all it takes is time and effort is kinda like saying all it takes to make a million dollars is to not spend anything until you have a million dollars.

Most households today have both parents working, so there's less time/energy/effort to put into cooking food, hence the predilection for processed foods.

I don't think anyone is saying that eating healthy is impossible, or even difficult; they're saying that it's easier to eat junk food.

[LnGrrrR]

Yes. If "selected" means shopping at Whole Foods and buying boutique health foods, then yes, it's a lot more expensive, but that's not what I am talking about. I'm talking about making healthier choices at an average grocery store, the planning and preparation of meals using fresh, healthy ingredients.

It's not a revolutionary idea. It's as simple as Cheerios>Froot Loops or Fruit>Fruit Roll Ups or Yogurt>GoGurt . . . make your own cookies, don't buy soda pop . . . it's not hard.

I'm pretty sure the study consisted of buying healthy and unhealthy foods at the same places. It wouldn't make sense for them to compare prices of unhealthy foods at one kind of supermarket with prices of healthy foods at another.

[lefty]

http://www.989thedrive.com/thedrive/wp-content/Food_Poutine_Closeup.jpg

[Winehole23]

ohmwrecker seems to have a hard time admitting greyforest is right about whole foods being more expensive, so he continues to distract, derail and split hairs.

(Being right must be very, very important.)

[ohmwrecker]

So apparently your conclusion is that the government is taking whole grain food out of the equation.

I was asking questions to give you the opportunity to provide evidence of such. You haven't, so I'll go ahead and call bullshit.

No more troubles. :tu

You asked me to name one specific food that a government subsidized farm that grow massive corn crops cannot grow and I gave one example.

Provide evidence of what? You are having a purposefully obtuse semantic argument and I am not participating. The whole point of the OP is that Americans choose to eat junk because it is A) cheaper B) more available C) more convenient.

I am trying to show that it is harder, but not impossible to make healthier choices. If you want to disagree, that's your prerogative, but nothing I said is bullshit. It's all fact. If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.

[ohmwrecker]

ohmwrecker seems to have a hard time admitting greyforest is right about whole foods being more expensive, so he continues to distract, derail and split hairs.

(Being right must be very, very important.)

Never made the claim tbh. Where do I "distract, derail and split hairs"?

I don't care about being "right", whatever that means. I'm not the one trying to disprove or discredit anything.

[sickdsm]

I see where you're trying to go with the whole farms not being able to grow anything they want.

Years ago, like in 20 years, yes, the govt. specifically told you how many acres of each crop you could grow. What ohm i think is trying to say it is not economically feasible to grow anything other than corn/beans??? The farm program has always been for keeping the govt. in control of the food situation. You can guarantee that i'm always going to raise what I can make the most money from. I could give a shit about some idiots saying that on my land i should grow food for them. Whether its soybeans for plastic, cotton for clothing, hemp for rope, or switchgrass/corn for ethanol, don't think for a second that the american farmers are a nonprofit organization. Govt's that don't subsidy the crops they need are the ones that the people stave while the farmers grow things like poppys.

I imagine I could grow fruit/veggies but the climate wouldn't be ideal for that here. Not only that but the infrastructure/workers need to be in the area. In the whole world, this is where corn is grown! I don't know why such a wonderful resource is constantly being tried to bend towards something else.

[sickdsm]

I was going to argue with you ohm about healthy being more expensive but when you brake it down to the essentials, you're pretty close on costs. When people make even basic meals, a lot is premade. Hell, my wife makes awesome homemade pizza but we both laugh when we realize she's doing it with premade dough mix.


If someone wants to complain about fruits/veggies being expensive, try growing them yourselves. Very fussy in regards to disease, moisture, insects and regulations. Labor and time intensive and not to mention few areas are ideal for each type of fruit.

[LnGrrrR]

Provide evidence of what? You are having a purposefully obtuse semantic argument and I am not participating. The whole point of the OP is that Americans choose to eat junk because it is A) cheaper B) more available C) more convenient.

Do you disagree with A, B or C?


I am trying to show that it is harder, but not impossible to make healthier choices. If you want to disagree, that's your prerogative, but nothing I said is bullshit. It's all fact. If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.

Has anyone said it's impossible to eat healthy food? Looks like a strawman to me.

[ohmwrecker]

Do you disagree with A, B or C?


Nope.



Has anyone said it's impossible to eat healthy food? Looks like a strawman to me.

Why so literal? All I am saying is that it is not as hard as people make it out to be. When you think about the health benefits, especially for children, it is worth the slight increase in cost, time, effort and small inconvenience.

Strawman? I've stuck as close to my original point as possible. Especially with four people arguing against everything but the point I am making.

[Blake]

but nothing I said is bullshit. It's all fact.

bullshit


The government is literally pushing junk food on the American public and taking the market for fresh, healthy food out of the equation.

bullshit

[Blake]

Why so literal? All I am saying is that it is not as hard as people make it out to be. When you think about the health benefits, especially for children, it is worth the slight increase in cost, time, effort and small inconvenience.

Strawman? I've stuck as close to my original point as possible. Especially with four people arguing against everything but the point I am making.

healthy food is as cheap yet is being taken out of the equation.

tightrope much?

[ohmwrecker]

healthy food is cheaper yet is being taken out of the equation.

tightrope much?

I never said healthy food was cheaper. I said it is being taken out of the equation in the context of a government subsidized farm that is not allowed to grow it if they want to keep their subsidy. No bullshit.

Dense much?

[Blake]

I never said healthy food was cheaper.

edited accordingly.


I said it is being taken out of the equation in the context of a government subsidized farm that is not allowed to grow it if they want to keep their subsidy. No bullshit.

Dense much?

you literally said the American government is literally pushing junk food on the American public.

bullshit much?

[ohmwrecker]

edited accordingly.


lol What?!




you literally said the American government is literally pushing junk food on the American public.

bullshit much?

The government pay farmers to grow corn (and nothing else) to be used to process hfcs. If those farms grow anything else for profit the government will take away their subsidy. Therefore, the government is paying farmers to produce junk food to the detriment of the health of it's citizens. I don't know how much more clearly I can state this fact.
Honestly, I am out of patience in regards to arguing this point with someone who is too stupid, or pretending to be too stupid, to comprehend what I am saying. If you disagree with me, I am fine with that, but as far as I am concerned, this conversation is over.

[LnGrrrR]

Nope.

I don't quite see your argument then. You agree with the OP.

If you agree with A, B, and C, maybe you should argue about the reason why people seem to eat junk food more. Is it because junk food is cheaper now than it used to be compared to healthy foods? are people intrinsically more lazy/dumber/etc? A lack of time to prepare healthy food?


Why so literal? All I am saying is that it is not as hard as people make it out to be. When you think about the health benefits, especially for children, it is worth the slight increase in cost, time, effort and small inconvenience.

Again, I don't think anyone is arguing about the worthiness of eating healthy food.

You cast off the increase in time/cost as "slight" and a "small" inconvenience. To you, it might be, to others, it might not. Maybe that extra hour of rest a person gets when they get home is worth more to them than preparing a meal.

Your argument seems to be that



Everyone seems to have forgotten that people used to eat a lot healthier with less conveniences than we have now. It's ignorance and laziness. There's no getting around that.


Without bothering to note other factors, ie. cost of food, prevalence of two workers in the household, etc etc.

Heck, you outright dismiss a scientific study.

[ohmwrecker]

I don't quite see your argument then. You agree with the OP.

If you agree with A, B, and C, maybe you should argue about the reason why people seem to eat junk food more. Is it because junk food is cheaper now than it used to be compared to healthy foods? are people intrinsically more lazy/dumber/etc? A lack of time to prepare healthy food?

I really don't understand the confusion. My argument is that the cost is negligible when weighed against the benefits of a healthy diet. I think it's more about people making the easy choice rather than the right choice.


Again, I don't think anyone is arguing about the worthiness of eating healthy food.

I agree. That doesn't make much sense.



You cast off the increase in time/cost as "slight" and a "small" inconvenience. To you, it might be, to others, it might not. Maybe that extra hour of rest a person gets when they get home is worth more to them than preparing a meal.

I can see the value in the difficulty some families might experience. When I first started making a conscience effort to make better choices, i found it difficult too, but once it became part of my routine and life, it became less of an inconvenience.


Heck, you outright dismiss a scientific study.

I'm positive that I did not dismiss the study.

[Blake]

....but healthy food does not really cost more. It is more about time, effort an inconvenience.


healthy food is as cheap yet is being taken out of the equation.

tightrope much?


edited accordingly.



lol What?!

Edited accordingly.

My typing did not stutter.


The government pay farmers to grow corn (and nothing else) to be used to process hfcs. If those farms grow anything else for profit the government will take away their subsidy. Therefore, the government is paying farmers to produce junk food to the detriment of the health of it's citizens. I don't know how much more clearly I can state this fact.

True or false: the government subsidizes other crops besides corn.

True or false: corn is grown for other things besides HFCS


Honestly, I am out of patience in regards to arguing this point with someone who is too stupid, or pretending to be too stupid, to comprehend what I am saying. If you disagree with me, I am fine with that, but as far as I am concerned, this conversation is over.

I know what you are saying and honestly, it's bullshit.

For the record, corn is a grain.

[sickdsm]

lol What?!





The government pay farmers to grow corn (and nothing else) to be used to process hfcs. If those farms grow anything else for profit the government will take away their subsidy. Therefore, the government is paying farmers to produce junk food to the detriment of the health of it's citizens. I don't know how much more clearly I can state this fact.
Honestly, I am out of patience in regards to arguing this point with someone who is too stupid, or pretending to be too stupid, to comprehend what I am saying. If you disagree with me, I am fine with that, but as far as I am concerned, this conversation is over.


I don't know where you're getting this from. If you're saying that if farms want to cash in on a certain subsidy directed at HFCS, then yes, they have to grow corn. Otherwise you don't know what you're talking about regarding crop subsidies. Virtually none of the corn I've grown has ever gone into making HFCS. Lots of farmers have never grown corn and receive subsidies.
:huh

[Blake]

I'm positive that I did not dismiss the study.

I'm positive you just dropped more bullshit into the thread

[ohmwrecker]

I don't know where you're getting this from. If you're saying that if farms want to cash in on a certain subsidy directed at HFCS, then yes, they have to grow corn. Otherwise you don't know what you're talking about regarding crop subsidies. Virtually none of the corn I've grown has ever gone into making HFCS. Lots of farmers have never grown corn and receive subsidies.
:huh

I concede that you probably know more about farming than I do but . . .

Yes. They have to grow corn and are not allowed to grow any other crops for profit or they will lose their subsidy. What product of corn, other than it's own pure form, is considered healthy?

[Blake]

I concede that you probably know more about farming than I do but . . .

Yes. They have to grow corn and are not allowed to grow any other crops for profit or they will lose their subsidy. What product of corn, other than it's own pure form, is considered healthy?

Livestock feed is considered healthy to livestock.

what percent of all corn grown in the US do you think is made for HFCS?

[ohmwrecker]

True or false: the government subsidizes other crops besides corn.

True or false: corn is grown for other things besides HFCS

Both of those things are true and I never stated otherwise. I am referring specifically to farms the grow government subsidized corn crops for hfcs. Don't try to imply that I am saying more than that.


For the record, corn is a grain.

It is. There are others.

[sickdsm]

HFCS is healthy.

Prove me how its not.


Doctors can't help you on that one.

[ohmwrecker]

Livestock feed is considered healthy to livestock.

We are talking about human consumption.


what percent of all corn grown in the US do you think is made for HFCS?

I have know idea. What percentage of processed foods sold in the U.S. contain hfcs?

[sickdsm]

I concede that you probably know more about farming than I do but . . .

Yes. They have to grow corn and are not allowed to grow any other crops for profit or they will lose their subsidy. What product of corn, other than it's own pure form, is considered healthy?


Again, explain what you're trying to say.

[ohmwrecker]

HFCS is healthy.

Prove me how its not.


Doctors can't help you on that one.

Uh . . . diabetes?

[ohmwrecker]

Again, explain what you're trying to say.

I really can't say it any more clearly than that. Sorry.

[sickdsm]

Uh . . . diabetes?

In moderation?

Same as table sugar, honey.


Suddenly pure honey is bad for you?

[sickdsm]

I really can't say it any more clearly than that. Sorry.


Then you're flat out lieing.
:nope

[sickdsm]

I concede that you probably know more about farming than I do but . . .

Yes. They have to grow corn and are not allowed to grow any other crops for profit or they will lose their subsidy. What product of corn, other than it's own pure form, is considered healthy?

Aspirin
Penicillin
Yogurt
Corn Flour
Cereal
Margarine
Peanut Butter


You need more?

[ohmwrecker]

In moderation?

Same as table sugar, honey.


Suddenly pure honey is bad for you?

No. That's quite a jump there, don't you think?


How much moderation is going on if it's in so many products and in uncontrollable amounts. You and I can definitely control the amount of sugar or honey we use. Also, the processing of hfcs is an issue. There isn't a lot of processing happening with honey.

Are you seriously comparing hfcs to honey?

[ohmwrecker]

Aspirin
Penicillin
Yogurt
Corn Flour
Cereal
Margarine
Peanut Butter


You need more?

It's hfcs if it's used as a sweetner. You can make yogurt and peanut butter without hfcs.

[sickdsm]

The American Dietetic Association found that “once they are absorbed into the bloodstream, the two sweeteners are indistinguishable.” (sugar and HFCS)


http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2008/04/18/what-sweetener-should-you-choose-sugar-honey-agave-nectar/


Most often, I hear people talking about avoiding products with HFCS or sugar and opting instead for a “natural sweetener” like honey or agave nectar. Surely these all-natural forms of sugar are more healthful, right? Well, certainly not in terms of fructose content. Honey typically has about the same ratio as HFCS. Agave nectar can range from 56-92% fructose, depending on the brand. There are other options like evaporated cane juice, which vary in quantity of sucrose (and therefore fructose), but the best number I came up with was 85-95% sucrose, meaning 42.5-47.5% fructose.(5) The only mark I’ll give them above other sweeteners is that they’re less processed.


Are you trying to say ANY sugar is equivalent to the devil?

[sickdsm]

It's hfcs if it's used as a sweetner. You can make yogurt and peanut butter without hfcs.


Sure, but is one healthier or worse for you?
:lmao

[sickdsm]

I concede that you probably know more about farming than I do but . . .

Yes. They have to grow corn and are not allowed to grow any other crops for profit or they will lose their subsidy. What product of corn, other than it's own pure form, is considered healthy?


You do realize the "they" you are talking about is me, right?

[Blake]

I am referring specifically to farms the grow government subsidized corn crops for hfcs. Don't try to imply that I am saying more than that.

Bullshit.

The government does not subsidize high fructose corn syrup.

This is fun. :tu

[ohmwrecker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/opinion/04pollan.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/125841-taking-on-childhood-obesity-by-attack

btw, I support Americans farms to the fullest and in no way am I trying to insult anyone who makes their living working a farm.

[Blake]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/opinion/04pollan.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/125841-taking-on-childhood-obesity-by-attack

btw, I support Americans farms to the fullest and in no way am I trying to insult anyone who makes their living working a farm.

where in those blogs does it talk about farms that grow corn specifically for hfcs?

moving the goalposts is bullshit.

[sickdsm]

The reason HFCS is used in soda instead of sugar is not that subsidies to corn farmers make HFCS cheaper; the sugar program that keeps sugar exports out makes U.S. sugar much more expensive. The world price of sugar is $0.10-$0.20 per lb. cheaper than what users pay in the U.S. It's also the reason most of the candy factories in Chicago have disappeared.

Furthermore, while plenty of reasons exist to dislike farm programs, the obesity epidemic cannot be laid at their feet. No evidence exists that payments to farmers make food cheaper—if that is, in fact, a contributor to obesity.
BY JCM on 10/27/2010 at 18:05
Terrible reporting job, on two counts.

First, there is no subsidy of corn starch or corn grain itself. What there is, bizarre as it seems, is a "direct payment" program to farmers who at one time produced corn, but the amount of that payment is not linked at all to production or price now, so it is not in any sense a subsidy of corn production.

Second, corn price is twice the level of the first half-decade of the century. Subsidies are not making corn cheap - it has not been cheap at all. So cheap corn is definitely not the reason so much sweetener is used in soft drinks. Think of another theory.

I'm not a supporter of the direct payment program. I'm also not a supporter of misleading and plain wrong reporting.


These are the first two comments on your article. Whatever.


HFCS is not ONE BIT MORE of a health problem then honey or table sugar. No wonder Peterson said that people just don't get it.


If people want healthy, you're going to have to give me a reason to grow it. Just because you're neighbor's a fatass doesn't mean i'm going to grow carrots over corn. Guess what? That means..........You'd have to subsidize it!!!! Either that or pay more because it has a high cost of production.

[sickdsm]

direct payments, countercyclical payments and loan deficiency payments that subsidize the five big commodity crops — corn, wheat, rice, soybeans and cotton


There goes THAT theory......


Not to mention, LDP's were only in effect when corn was well below the cost of production. I don't remember a LDP in at least 6 years, there is no way you'll see one again at those levels.

Only the southern farmer really cares about the other two payments.


Axe the whole thing for all I care, but don't get too worked up when the american farmer does not have to abide by a set of rules on growing and it affects the average joe.

[LnGrrrR]

I really don't understand the confusion. My argument is that the cost is negligible when weighed against the benefits of a healthy diet. I think it's more about people making the easy choice rather than the right choice.

Yes, but that's like saying "I don't see why people don't go without cable tv/Internet/phone in order to save more money towards retirement."

It may be smarter, but many people don't find that tradeoff worth it. Just because you are willing to trade time for healthy food doesn't mean everyone else. In the same manner, do you work out for 30 mins at least 3 times a week? If not, why not?



I can see the value in the difficulty some families might experience. When I first started making a conscience effort to make better choices, i found it difficult too, but once it became part of my routine and life, it became less of an inconvenience.



I'm positive that I did not dismiss the study.

Ok, so you find it worth it. Great. But considering the OP was about how crap food was easier to eat then good food, you only prove the point.

I thought the point of the thread was to try to balance the cheap/good food cost ratios, and find ways to encourage consumers to eat healthy. Telling them they are lazy and ignorant probably won't work.

[Winehole23]

Never made the claim tbh. Where do I "distract, derail and split hairs"? You stopped?

Congratulations! :rollin

[greyforest]

The American Dietetic Association found that “once they are absorbed into the bloodstream, the two sweeteners are indistinguishable.” (sugar and HFCS)


http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2008/04/18/what-sweetener-should-you-choose-sugar-honey-agave-nectar/


Okay, but then there are also studies that show that HFCS causes obesity more excessively when compared to sucrose alone. It is true, though, that on a molecular level they are converted to the same molecule. How can this be?

My personal theory is that HFCS is more completely absorbed by the intestines than sucrose is.

Compare a Mexican cane-sugar Coca-Cola with it's US HFCS counterpart. I personally notice that a slimy film lines my mouth more noticeably with the HFCS. This undoubtedly also happens to the lining of the digestive tract. This is all just speculation, but I'll bet you a diddled-eyed Joe to a damned-if-I-know that sucrose is more freely suspended in the digestive tract, and thus less completely absorbed than is HFCS, clinging to the absorptive walls of your bowels.

If someone throws me some grant money I could research it :wakeup

[greyforest]

Oh yeah, also there's mercury in it:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2

[boutons_deux]

"American Dietetic Association"

.... just another entity captured, financed, and corrupted by corporations.

[sickdsm]

"My personal theory......."

[Blake]

Oh yeah, also there's mercury in it:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2


Woodhall Stopford, MD, MSPH, of Duke University Medical Center, one of the nation’s leading experts in mercury contamination, reviewed the results of total mercury testing of samples of high fructose corn syrup conducted by Eurofins Central Analytical Laboratory (Metairie, LA) in February and March 2009. Dr. Stopford concluded:

•No quantifiable mercury was detected in any of the samples analyzed.
•High fructose corn syrup does not appear to be a measurable contributor to mercury in foods.
In his summary of findings, Dr. Stopford stated, "Mercury is ubiquitous in the environment being generated both by man-made activities (such as coal-fired power plants) and by natural phenomenon (such as volcanoes). Mercury is found naturally in all living things, including all categories of foods and beverages. Levels in foods and beverages have dropped significantly in the last 40 years. The introduction of high fructose corn syrup as a sweetener has not been associated with any noticeable difference in mercury levels in foods and beverages containing high fructose corn syrup. Levels of mercury found in such foods and beverages are what would be expected from mercury found normally in such foods and beverages and are at background levels."

To view Dr. Stopford’s analysis and conclusions, please see: http://duketox.mc.duke.edu/HFCS%20test%20results4.doc.

http://www.sweetsurprise.com/news-and-press/hfcs-mercury

[Winehole23]

I even started the next sentence with "But seriously...." and you're too stupid to catch that?You said something?

[Winehole23]

I might have read your post in haste.

Unfortunately for me, more careful reading will not avail me in the future -- or indeed at any time at all -- owing to my previously stipulated stupidity.

[Winehole23]

What a pity.

[greyforest]

Oh yeah, also there's mercury in it:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2


An EHO at the FDA conducted an investigation of the chlor-alkali industry in 2004 and found mercury residue in all of the mercury cell chlor-alkali products including caustic soda, chlorine, potassium hydroxide, and hydrochloric acid. Mercury is widely accepted to be a neurotoxic heavy metal [23]. The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that minimizing any form of mercury exposure is essential for optimal child health and nervous system development [6]. Current international food processing standards allow 1.0 μg mercury/g caustic soda [21,22] and there is no standard for mercury in food grade hydrochloric acid. Both of these chemicals may be used to make HFCS. Mercury contamination of food products as a result of the use of mercury contaminated HFCS seems like a very real possibility. With daily per capita consumption of HFCS in the US averaging about 50 grams and daily mercury intakes from HFCS ranging up to 28 μg, this potential source of mercury may exceed other major sources of mercury especially in high-end consumers of beverages sweetened with HFCS. Food products that contain a significant amount of HFCS should be tested for mercury contamination in the end product and the public should be informed of any detections. Clearly, more research is needed to determine the extent of mercury exposure in children from mercury contaminated HFCS in food products.

and yes "my personal theory" is just that :lol a theory, needs testing. If anyone wants to throw me some grant money I could research it :wakeup

[greyforest]

dude your website linked is www.sweetsurprise.com ...after glancing at it, do you really think it will be unbiased?

[Blake]

dude your website linked is www.sweetsurprise.com ...after glancing at it, do you really think it will be unbiased?

sweetsurprise.com is absolutely biased.

I don't think Dr. Woodhall Stopford is biased though. Do you?

If so, why?

[Ashy Larry]

bullshit.

that shit doesn't rot

if it don't rot, don't eat it.

if man made it, don't eat it.


Jack LaLanne, dude was a straight gangsta

[greyforest]

sweetsurprise.com is absolutely biased.

I don't think Dr. Woodhall Stopford is biased though. Do you?

If so, why?

He may or may not be paid by corn lobbyists to appear unbiased but find "data" that shows that HFCS is safe and healthy.

Renee Dufault may or may not be paid by anti-corn lobbyists to appear unbiased but find "data" that shows that HFCS is potentially unsafe and full of mercury.

Capitalism!

[Blake]

He may or may not be paid by corn lobbyists to appear unbiased but find "data" that shows that HFCS is safe and healthy.

Renee Dufault may or may not be paid by anti-corn lobbyists to appear unbiased but find "data" that shows that HFCS is potentially unsafe and full of mercury.

Capitalism!

I believe both sources are unbiased until proven otherwise.

Did you read the entire study from the link you posted?

[boutons_deux]

Nobody needs no fucking studies and pissing matches about value or worthlessness of HFCS.

Extracting HFCS out of its natural matrix of (heavily subsized) corn kernels and then using it to sweeten damn near everything is known an "industrial processing" and artificial concentration of super-fast/High GI carbs.

Corn is already a fairly low quality food. That's why a large majority of US corn is fed to animals, simply to make them fat. Compare the grease bag of of factory pig with its lean and mean feral hog cousins.

Fast carbs cause spikes in insulin (which is really nasty hormone) to convert the excess carbs into triglycerides (aka fat) so it can be stored in fat cells. After many years of insulin spiking, the body becomes insensitive to insulin, blood glucose doesn't come down anymore, aka, you're self-inflicted with TypeII diabetes, which is another epidemic.

Not claiming causality, but there is correlation between the pervasive infiltration of HFCS into nearly all industrial food-like substances and the multi-decade, ongoing epidemic of overweight and obesity in all age groups.

There is simply no justification for HFCS in anything, except BigFood suckering sheeple into feeding their sweet tooth and increasing BigFood profits.

[greyforest]

I believe both sources are unbiased until proven otherwise.

Did you read the entire study from the link you posted?

Yes, I did.

The two studies are contradictory. Your study says:

•No quantifiable mercury was detected in any of the samples analyzed.
•High fructose corn syrup does not appear to be a measurable contributor to mercury in foods.

But then my study says:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2/table/T1

That means you can't believe both of them, and that one of them is wrong.

[sickdsm]

Nobody needs no fucking studies and pissing matches about value or worthlessness of HFCS.

Extracting HFCS out of its natural matrix of (heavily subsized) corn kernels and then using it to sweeten damn near everything is known an "industrial processing" and artificial concentration of super-fast/High GI carbs.

Corn is already a fairly low quality food. That's why a large majority of US corn is fed to animals, simply to make them fat. Compare the grease bag of of factory pig with its lean and mean feral hog cousins.

Fast carbs cause spikes in insulin (which is really nasty hormone) to convert the excess carbs into triglycerides (aka fat) so it can be stored in fat cells. After many years of insulin spiking, the body becomes insensitive to insulin, blood glucose doesn't come down anymore, aka, you're self-inflicted with TypeII diabetes, which is another epidemic.

Not claiming causality, but there is correlation between the pervasive infiltration of HFCS into nearly all industrial food-like substances and the multi-decade, ongoing epidemic of overweight and obesity in all age groups.

There is simply no justification for HFCS in anything, except BigFood suckering sheeple into feeding their sweet tooth and increasing BigFood profits.



You're talking about different things. Corn can be starch, sugar or protein. Whatever you need it to do, corn can.

[Blake]

Yes, I did.

The two studies are contradictory. Your study says:


But then my study says:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2/table/T1

That means you can't believe both of them, and that one of them is wrong.

In those studies done, what percent of the time was mercury found in those foods containing HFCS?

[boutons_deux]

You're talking about different things. Corn can be starch, sugar or protein. Whatever you need it to do, corn can.

bullshit. corn, variable, is 88% starch (carb) and 8% protein. It's main value is the cheap, subsidized carbs for fattening animals.

Like sheeple, cows eat just about any old shit they're fed.

Cows, their guts, evolved eating low-calorie leaves (grass), not high-calorie/high-carb seeds (corn). As with sheeple, cows eating so much carbs causes gastrointestinal and systemic acidity, which promotes the growth the the form of E. coli that is sickening/fatatl to humans. That form of E. coli is almost non-existent in grass-fed cows.

BigFood is one of the disasters of American civilization, and a huge reason Americans are so fat and diseased.

[sickdsm]

:rolleyes


Have you not heard of converting starch to sugar?


I'm feeding very high protein MWDGS right now, a vastly superior quality feed than anything i'm aware of locally. You might know it as a byproduct of ethanol, derived from corn starch turned into sugar. We export alot of this oversees as it is so much more efficient than corn.

Quick, google it.

Corn can be starch, protein, or sugar. Whatever you need it to be.

Feeding corn to fatten cattle is so 1990's. Get with the times.

American's are fat because we have no self control and we're lazy. Blame it on a product.


While your at it, where is that one and done GMO seed sold at again? You forgot to show me.........

[Blake]

BigFood is one of the disasters of American civilization, and a huge reason Americans are so fat and diseased.

It's ok. I have faith that BigPharma will keep me alive til I hit 100.

What does a typical meal eaten by boutons_deux consist of?

[greyforest]

In those studies done, what percent of the time was mercury found in those foods containing HFCS?

Your question is egregious. The study tests pure HFCS from three manufacturers, not foods with HFCS added to them. The study finds that 9 of the 20 HFCS samples has a detectable amount of mercury.

I'm glad you're not a scientist. If a certain kind of paint is reported to contain more lead than it is supposed to, you would not test the paint. You would try to find houses that had been painted with the paint and test the houses.

Are you tired of being owned yet or do you have some other moronic inquiries?

[boutons_deux]

"Have you not heard of converting starch to sugar?"

starch and sugar are both carbohydrates.

how can corn carbs be converted to protein, and why would any human or animal want to eat such synthetic shit?

[elbamba]

My kids get fast food about once every three-four months. We can afford to eat out but choose not too. When we do go out, we hold the fries and soda. If we want to take the family out to a nicer place, we usaully require our children to eat grilled food and either veggies/salad.

It can be done. Despite many people believing that the dollar menu is cheaper than shopping for fruits and vegitables, it just isn't true.

[elbamba]

Water is free yet people would rather give their kids sugar drinks because it says made with real fruit.

Banannas are cheap, carrots are cheap, certain kids of appels are cheap, buying fruit at the right season will always be cheap. Broccoli, fresh green beans.
All of these can be purchased at any store for less money than a couple boxes of chips, crackers, sugar drinks, sugar cereal and the other crap with which people feed their families.

I am all for a junk food tax. It might not be perfect, but you could tax anything with transfat in it, you could tax soda and other high calorie drinks, you could add a fast food tax including sandwhich shops, which everyone seems to think is healthy.

[sickdsm]

"Have you not heard of converting starch to sugar?"

starch and sugar are both carbohydrates.

how can corn carbs be converted to protein, and why would any human or animal want to eat such synthetic shit?

If you're ill informed, i suggest maybe you bone up on your knowledge before you spout BS.

All your shit you spew about ethanol and you don't have a CLUE about the byproducts?

:lmao

[sickdsm]

We try to eat healthy, but we're not saints. Its a tough road raising kids. I don't want to deprive him of things, but i do try to get him on the right path, whether thats tv, games or food. His biggest treat to drink is apple or orange juice. Veggies are a fight with him but he's a meat and potato eater, not much of a sweet tooth. He's never had chocolate milk yet, alot of kids i knew growing up seemed spoiled bc that's the only way they would drink milk. We babysat another 2 yr old awhile back and were astonished to find bottles of Mtn Dew in their backpack.

I remember YEARS ago, me and a friend watching his baby brother and the kid going through two cans of Coke in a bottle. Not a sippie cup, a BOTTLE.

I'm blessed with a wonderful wife that's able to quickly make homemade meals that taste restaurant quality. Some times i don't believe her and ask everything she puts in a dish, no seasoning packets either. So it CAN be done.

[Blake]

Oh yeah, also there's mercury in it:
http://ehjournal.net/content/8/1/2



Your question is egregious. The study tests pure HFCS from three manufacturers, not foods with HFCS added to them. The study finds that 9 of the 20 HFCS samples has a detectable amount of mercury.

I'm glad you're not a scientist. If a certain kind of paint is reported to contain more lead than it is supposed to, you would not test the paint. You would try to find houses that had been painted with the paint and test the houses.

I'd probably want to investigate the manufacturing plant first.

Glad you don't work for the FDA.


Are you tired of being owned yet or do you have some other moronic inquiries?

You helped confirm that your first blanket statement mercury being in HFCS was pretty shitty.

No more inquiries. :tu

[Blake]

I am all for a junk food tax. It might not be perfect, but you could tax anything with transfat in it, you could tax soda and other high calorie drinks, you could add a fast food tax including sandwhich shops, which everyone seems to think is healthy.

Would you put a junk food tax on 0 calorie diet soda?

[elbamba]

Would you put a junk food tax on 0 calorie diet soda?

Yes

[lefty]

Would you put a junk food tax on 0 calorie diet soda?
I would

[Blake]

Yes

What about regular bottled ginseng tea that might contain 70 calories pet serving?

[RandomGuy]

I'm sure government farm subsidies help fruit producers as well. There was a time when buying fruit at the grocery store was cheaper than buying processed foods but over the years that changed and I don't think it was government subsidies that changed things nor do I think it was in the hands of the grocery store to change things as the President suggest (if Walmart would just stop buying those dang fruit loops). Choices made by the consumer caused the shift and could cause it to shift back, but why would we do that? Why go back to buying carrots and turnips when you can get a whole serving of vegetables in a glass of V-8? Its called progress. Is it really a bad thing that fresh produce cost more than the box Fruit Loops?

Nope. IMO

Unless, of course you are rasing a family of 5 on a thin budget.

What exactly is the "free market" non-governmental solution to the fact that sugary cereals are cheaper?

Choose to feed your children less, because you only give them the amount of fruit your money can buy?

[sickdsm]

Sugary cereals are cheaper than what? Fruit and veggies? You might as well be comparing a new car to a sock. Isn't it harder to get migrant workers now then 10 years ago? Was there outrage by the same people who demand fruit be cheaper?